What can I say to "Glenn Beck" follower?

[Lolly]

I have an email correspondent in America. She mentioned once that she watches Glenn Beck and recently asked me if I knew what was happening in America and told me that the constitution was being attacked and that it was no longer the America she could be proud of.

So far, I've made no response and just let it go. I've googled and searched the forum, but couldn't find anything clear and specific as to how to respond to this type of thing. I'm not in the US, so I only know what I've read on here, googled or come across in the media.

Any suggestions as to how to respond if she brings it up again (without alienating her completely)? Are there any good sites that balance out what is being fed to people by Glenn Beck or wherever else these ideas are originating? Thanks.

 

[Drudgewire]

Point out that real patriots like Alex "not a lunatic at all" Jones don't trust him.



Oh wait, that probably doesn't help.

 

[Upchurch]

Point out that real patriots like Alex "not a lunatic at all" Jones don't trust him.



Oh wait, that probably doesn't help. [qimg]http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/redface.gif[/qimg]

Two peas in a crazy, crazy pod.

 

[cwalner]

Any suggestions as to how to respond if she brings it up again (without alienating her completely)? Are there any good sites that balance out what is being fed to people by Glenn Beck or wherever else these ideas are originating? Thanks.

Hard to do because Beck is pretty broad in his range of complaints. I would tell your friend that you are not that familiar with what is going in the US and ask her for specifics on how the constitution is under attack.

Her response should give you enough to investigoogle and find counters. If not we are always here to help.

 

[Lolly]

thanks cwalner. I really don't want to know or hear more nonsense (I just get aggravated)... I'd rather just say something like "I think you might be mistaken in thinking that....have a look at this" or "sometimes people who are feeding you information have a hidden agenda, did you know...." or something that sums up "it's a load of crap, don't believe it" or somewhere that puts up counter-information that the US is not suddenly being sent down the drain by those with nefarious intent.

 

[Nova Land]

Are there any good sites that balance out what is being fed to people by Glenn Beck or wherever else these ideas are originating? Thanks.

Media Matters for America does a good job of monitoring and documenting right-wing distortions, deceptions, and factual misstatements in various media -- radio, television, and print. Glenn Beck is one of the people whom they cover regularly in this regard.

There are a number of groups, both on the left and right, which attempt to monitor and document examples of media bias or media errors. Most of these do a poor job, at least from a skeptical point of view. Media Matters, in contrast, does a good job of presenting their examples in a clear, easy to check format.

(1) They generally give a good headline to identify what particular distortion they will deal with in the item.

(2) They generally start with a good summary of what was said or written, by whom, on what occasion, and what it is they think is incorrect in what was said or written.

(3) They give a short excerpt of the offending item, to show what it is which was said or written which they feel is incorrect.

(4) They give an explanation of the ways in which they believe the offending item is wrong, generally with links to supporting sources. Where possible, these links are generally to primary sources.

(5) In addition to the short summary of the offending item and the short excerpt from the offending item, Media Matters generally includes a lengthy transcript of the source from which the offending item comes, so that it can be read in context, as well as a link to a source where the item can be read in its entirety.​

This is an excellent model, which makes it easy for people to 'peer review' their claims and see which of their examples stand up to scrutiny. I don't know if the Media Matters items on Glenn Beck will be helpful to you or not, but I recommend it as one source you might look to.

 

[Denver]

Depending on how deep your friend has gone into the world of Beck, you may have a very hard time saying anything. Beck has changed over in the past months from merely political fear mongering, to religious political fear mongering: that is, rather than trying to justify his claims by using statements about the economy, or how we've lost our way from the principles of the founding fathers, he is now justifying his statements using God and the prophets.

So unfortunately, the argument has moved past politics to religion AND politics. If you do begin to question his politics, be prepared for an (even more than usual) religious zeal in the reaction you get.

 

[Madalch]

Say, "Glenn Beck? I thought he was a political comedian- what he says isn't actually serious, is it?"

 

[rwguinn]

Say nothing.
You are not going to change anybody's mind, no need to "be a dick"...

 

[Ysidro]

I'd go with "Why are you such an idiot?"

 

[Yalius]

How about, "I don't really follow American politics, but if you'd like to discuss <insert obscure Australian political commentator here>, I might be able to carry my weight in the conversation."

I've completely given up discussing politics with anyone outside my family, since it degenerates into pointless nitpicking and yelling or some sort of pseudo-congratulatory "Hurr hurr we're better than them" bragfest.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Ask her if she agrees with Glenn Beck's history lessons, where the Native Americans are actually displaced Israelites whose skin turned dark because they pissed off a god.

 

[Praktik]

Media Matters for America does a good job of monitoring and documenting right-wing distortions, deceptions, and factual misstatements in various media -- radio, television, and print. Glenn Beck is one of the people whom they cover regularly in this regard.

There are a number of groups, both on the left and right, which attempt to monitor and document examples of media bias or media errors. Most of these do a poor job, at least from a skeptical point of view. Media Matters, in contrast, does a good job of presenting their examples in a clear, easy to check format.

(1) They generally give a good headline to identify what particular distortion they will deal with in the item.

(2) They generally start with a good summary of what was said or written, by whom, on what occasion, and what it is they think is incorrect in what was said or written.

(3) They give a short excerpt of the offending item, to show what it is which was said or written which they feel is incorrect.

(4) They give an explanation of the ways in which they believe the offending item is wrong, generally with links to supporting sources. Where possible, these links are generally to primary sources.

(5) In addition to the short summary of the offending item and the short excerpt from the offending item, Media Matters generally includes a lengthy transcript of the source from which the offending item comes, so that it can be read in context, as well as a link to a source where the item can be read in its entirety.​

This is an excellent model, which makes it easy for people to 'peer review' their claims and see which of their examples stand up to scrutiny. I don't know if the Media Matters items on Glenn Beck will be helpful to you or not, but I recommend it as one source you might look to.

Look I like the approach too and used to visit the site a lot when I was much more closely monitoring the headlines. I feel like I've kind of run that area of things down though so I don't visit much anymore.

Here's the thing, if she watches Glenn Beck, she's likely watched Bill O'Reilly at least a bit. I'm not so sure about Beck because I watch O'Reilly more than I do him, but at least on the Factor - Media Matters is a regular whipping boy. Pointing her to the site, however well it might deconstruct media distortions will likely just identify Lolly as a liberal. And remember, if you're a conservative it's important to say the word "liberal" with the exact tone and delivery you'd say "take your soiled underwear off my pillow".

thanks cwalner. I really don't want to know or hear more nonsense (I just get aggravated)... I'd rather just say something like "I think you might be mistaken in thinking that....have a look at this" or "sometimes people who are feeding you information have a hidden agenda, did you know...." or something that sums up "it's a load of crap, don't believe it" or somewhere that puts up counter-information that the US is not suddenly being sent down the drain by those with nefarious intent.

I am not sure any of these approaches will be all that successful. The first needs a good thing to put in "have a look at this" and I'd stay away from using the word "mistaken". The 2nd will be perceived as condescending. The 3rd is too dismissive.

Here's what you do. As previously advised by cwalner, ask her for specifics. I would then look for conservative voices that disagree with her. This is the key. Remember that someone like her is very much like a fundamentalist, a 9/11 truther and other demographics that feel their particular chosen ideology/religion is under seige - they pose themselves against an antagonist. These are the modern Manichaeans. So anything like Media Matters, or a particularly well written piece by any "liberal" will be dismissed. You will quickly be placed in the "other" group she identifies herself against and written off.

So here are a few places to start.

I've actually been a subscriber to The American Conservative for some years (though I did just let it lapse) and it is a free-thinking conservative magazine. It has a pretty wide variety of writing actually, which ranges from the paleocon to libertarian to others besides - with a dose of catholic thought as well that can be intriguing from a sociological point of view. But you never get a Malkin/Coulter/Beck voice - EVER. Neoconservativism is pretty much despised by the editors and many of their writers.

Check out their site here they have a good blog section: www.amconmag.com

Its likely there will be some interesting conservative voices with a very un-Glenn Beck approach that could be used to counter the specifics she provides.

Conor Friedersdorf is a good name to look up too - but might be above her reading level occasionally, and might be deemed too willing to think about "liberal" ideas.

And there has been an interesting debate about the constitution in conservative circles in the blogosphere lately, check it out:

http://www.economist.com/node/17103701
http://www.frumforum.com/responding-to-larison
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/05/20/antibodies/

Do bear in mind that even this could be batted aside - cognitive dissonance is a powerful force. But you could show her that there are other types of conservatives out there. I think that Movement Conservatism's penchant for purity and identification of those insufficiently aligned with their Commandments creates a feeling that they have the only claim to "true" conservatism.

This could be a seed that is planted that moves her away from the more crass and foolish forms of it.

 

[Nova Land]

Media Matters for America does a good job of monitoring and documenting right-wing distortions, deceptions, and factual misstatements in various media -- radio, television, and print. Glenn Beck is one of the people whom they cover regularly in this regard... I don't know if the Media Matters items on Glenn Beck will be helpful to you or not, but I recommend it as one source you might look to.

Here's the thing, if she watches Glenn Beck, she's likely watched Bill O'Reilly at least a bit. I'm not so sure about Beck because I watch O'Reilly more than I do him, but at least on the Factor - Media Matters is a regular whipping boy. Pointing her to the site, however well it might deconstruct media distortions will likely just identify Lolly as a liberal. And remember, if you're a conservative it's important to say the word "liberal" with the exact tone and delivery you'd say "take your soiled underwear off my pillow".

Excellent point. I agree.

My intention was to say that MMfA might be a good site for Lolly to check in order to better understand some of the Beckian points her correspondent might bring up and to know ways in which these points are untrue -- not that it would be a good site for her to refer the Beck fan to. I expressed myself poorly

But even if I'd expressed myself better, it's still not very practical advice. It would call for a lot of work on Lolly's part: visiting the MMfA site, reading and digesting their material, and then trying to find a way to use it in explaining to her correspondent why Beck isn't someone to put a lot of credence into . And even if Lolly did all that work it's likely the points made at MMfA would not be the things which would speak best to her correspondent's concerns.

Your advice is much better and much more practical. There are many thoughtful conservative voices who have been critical of Beck, and those would likely be much more helpful resources to look to.

 

[leftysergeant]

Tell her that the only parts of the Constitution under direct attack are that part of the 1st Ammendment that separates church and state and the 14th Ammendment.

A the Vapo-Rub Kid is laying the howitzers.

 

[bit_pattern]

Two peas in a crazy, crazy pod.

I'm sure it's who Beck has based his persona on, a kind of more mainstream-palatable version of the same paranoid schtick.

 

[Lolly]

Media Matters for America does a good job of monitoring and documenting right-wing distortions, deceptions, and factual misstatements in various media

Thanks for the suggestion.

So unfortunately, the argument has moved past politics to religion AND politics.

You are not going to change anybody's mind

I don't intend to try. I was just hoping that there is some information out there that I could refer her to which might get her thinking a bit more deeply about what she thinks is "happening".

Ask her if she agrees with Glenn Beck's history lessons, where the Native Americans are actually displaced Israelites whose skin turned dark because they pissed off a god.

Is that paraphrased, or do you know a site where he says that so I can quote it?

if you're a conservative

I don't know what she is, just that she seems to have swallowed this "there's something to be afraid of" schtick.

I am not sure any of these approaches will be all that successful. The first needs a good thing to put in "have a look at this" and I'd stay away from using the word "mistaken". The 2nd will be perceived as condescending. The 3rd is too dismissive.

Yes, that's why I haven't said anything and am looking for some help as to what I might say without starting a fight, getting embroiled in debating it (I don't want to), but point her somewhere that might give her some balance. She loves googling information. I don't know how far she has sucked up these ideas, whether she has just come across it and is regurgitating it and could be dissuaded if she reads more about it from a different perspective. I don't think it's useful to categorize her as a fundamentalist conservative - as far as I know, she's just a "regular American" (which makes this rather scary, to me).

So here are a few places to start.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Your advice is much better and much more practical. There are many thoughtful conservative voices who have been critical of Beck, and those would likely be much more helpful resources to look to.

Noted, thanks.

 

[bit_pattern]

Tell her to watch the Daily Show! But seriously, if someone is so stupid as to swallow that schtick then you really don't have much of a chance of changing their mind from half way across the globe, as noble an intention as it may well be.

 

[Lolly]

But seriously, if someone is so stupid as to swallow that schtick then you really don't have much of a chance of changing their mind from half way across the globe.

You may be right, but I think that it would depend on how ingrained the belief is. I've regurgitated things I've heard, been told it's nonsense, and changed my mind. Others on the forum used to be religious and have changed their minds. I don't think that it's necessarily a waste of time, but information needs to be given, not just "don't be stupid, it's rubbish".

 

[bit_pattern]

You could tell her that you'd hear that he raped and killed a girl in 1990...